White supremacy is insidious. It manifests itself in ways that have become so normalized, that we are often unable to see it for what it is. A large part of this has to do with the superb colonial brainwashing that has occurred across the Americas and the rest of the world.
Many see the topic of individual and systemic racism as being a touchy topic – uncomfortable and best avoided. But what stifling of these conversations contributes to, is a lack of learning and accountability.
We tend to favour the promotion of colour-blindness – a half-measure that is largely insufficient to heal racial wounds. It is akin to throwing a wet blanket over racism and pretending it does not exist. This perspective usually comes from those who lack awareness of their own racial and economic privilege. It is an ideology grounded in ignorance.
Not talking about race is never an ideal we should strive for. Instead, it will do us all some good to become more conscious of race and how our privilege can be stymying the conversation on it. Colour-blindness can also fall victim to the rejection and invalidation of cultural heritages and unique experiences, and can often result in the exacerbation of internalized racism and anti-Blackness.
Raw honest conversations are intrinsic to the healing of racial wounds. One cannot come without our active interest in the other. Relying on a colour-blind approach that individualizes conflicts pertaining to race, rather than addressing systemic discriminatory practices is not something that is in the best interests of racial minorities. But we knew this already, don’t we?
It allows internalized and external anti-Blackness to continue unchecked, creating unsafe spaces for Black people and other minoritized populations. The most glaring evidence of this for me is particularly seen in the development industry, where the white-saviour complex and prioritization of white voices in minoritized countries and communities are all the rage.
This prioritization was recently experienced at a conference for regional Caribbean feminists, hosted by an Intergovernmental Organization. The first thing that stood out, but which I will not spend too much time exploring, was the choice to have a Swiss-German white woman facilitating a conference that was aimed towards regional Caribbean feminist building. Talk about unsound.
The glaring things that truly stood out to me however, were: The comfort with which this woman repeatedly used the N-word to “explain” a concept, the weaponization of their proximity to Blackness, white hurt and tears, and the way in which they were coddled and told they had done nothing wrong. I am never surprised when these things happen, because I am never surprised by whiteness, its privilege nor audacity. I was not surprised by the responses of a majority of my colleagues, because I understand the depths of internalized anti-Blackness and how it can manifest in placating behaviour. The reality is that white people long have, and continue to use the N-word. Some are encouraged by their Black friends as there is no consensus within the Black community (as was very clear at that conference), and some just do it in the presence of their white ones. It did feel though, like I was in the twilight zone, trying to explain why it was absolutely inappropriate for a white woman to use that word, regardless of the context in which it was used. It does not matter if you are saying it because it is the name of an item, and it does not matter if you have proximity to Blackness through a partner or children. You cannot separate the word from its history of white supremacy. You might not consider yourself to be racist for using it as a white person, (and you certainly might not be, even while internalizing anti-Black rhetoric), but it is a word that is historically and currently linked to racist violence.
The reality of the world we live in is that white people, whether they acknowledge it or want it, have inherent privileges that comes along with their skin colour, regardless of if they are a proponent of race blind theories or not. So, if working in predominantly Black and Brown spaces, it is important to understand the centuries-long power dynamics that are automatically in play, and make a conscious effort towards educating yourself on race, inherent biases and concepts of ethnic sensitivity, especially if one works in the development industry.
That experience was a missed opportunity, for the organizers of the conference, the facilitator and the participants, as it did not allow space for the growth and accountability that is necessary in these spaces when it comes to issues such as these. There is a cognitive dissonance that can often occur in social justice spaces that tends to promote the seeping in and solidification of harmful biases. Weaponizing victimhood to shift towards one’s feelings about being called out, rather than reflecting on one’s inherent biases is not the way to build movements, and it speaks towards one’s lack of trustworthiness in such spaces.
Political correctness is not running rogue, and people are not too sensitive, there is simply more accountability measures. We live in an age of information wherein one’s ignorance can easily be remedied if one actually cares about the people and mission that they serve. Listening to marginalized people when they speak about harmful words and behaviours means very little if one does not reflect on how one has caused harm, and actually do the internal and external work to do better moving forward. As a Black feminist operating in a sector that continues to prioritize white voices, I am painfully aware that experiences such as these will not stop, but A Luta Continua.
